We can't know Tradas numbers so all is based on guessing/assuming and fully theoretical level...
When changing to AG, they most probably are saving money in operational costs as AG is handling their support, payments, KYC etc.. Where they used to have own full time hired people which 100% sure is way more expensive than what AG is charging from their customers from that service where same people looking after tens of casinos.
When your withdrawals are pending 2 days to be reversible and many of your slots (all providers who provide different RTP:s) are set minimum RTP available and regulator accept, you get hold more of your players deposits, that's for sure, you just might have more challenges to make people deposit but if you can get new players like AG is reporting (these can be found from their quarter information which is public as they are stock listed in Sweden) you can make good profit even player retention and satisfaction would make many to play other places.
So for pretty sure can be known that at least with amount of staff they now need run Trada is less and operational costs are reduced and profits from deposit is higher.
Changing platform is quite big task what is hard to imagine any casino would do without very deep research and when you are already in business and make that research, it can't come as surprise how AG is operating and threating their players but you might be happy with that when at same time they will show you how much profit you can make from your players and how much cheaper costs are compare to current. Usually in business (and haven't learn that casinos are exception) final word for changes is coming from money, for owners that is pretty much the thing they want from their investment and most of decisions have that very well researched. Some times all people who are actually working there and thinking about players, do hate some changes (can't think in my head that Trada reps would be really happy to answer here to these questions and that they would rather pay more for customer satisfaction even it would cut profit margins) but as Conor said, these decisions are way above their pay class.
So when AG bought Pariplay, Trada for sure got nice offer from AG to join family, other option would probably have been to make contract with other platform provider and continue with your own license and your own great support and payment teams, but they did end up to join AG family.
We can only guess what was the reason and how it goes in practice. Don't know what should we hope, if they do great, it's good PR for AG and more casinos can decide to jump there when have to think how to cut costs and make more profit and guess most of us don't like to play in AG casinos at all, even they make nice profit to their owners.
The company behind Next/CL is Minotauro Media Ltd, registered in Ireland. Should be fairly easy to get a company filing report if they have a similar "Companies House" site like the UK. Don't know and haven't researched either.
Aspire is one of the most profitable platforms at the moment, so from a business point of view, they are doing many things right. Low game RTPs, pending periods, fees on deposits/withdrawals (not all brands), common CS, high WR on bonuses with mediocre game contributions, etc.
Their business model is not particularly focused on player retention. IMO, they follow the herd principle. The bigger the herd that goes through their doors the more will stick, one way or the other, e.g. players who hit a big win and withdraw on their first visit will most likely return as in saying "this could be my lucky casino".
So they make sure the herd of new players is large enough with a good welcome offer. If they stick fine, if not, the door at the back is nearly just as wide open.
Any casino manager will be able to confirm that player retention tools are costly - loyalty program, frequent bonuses, fair WR terms, 24/7 support, tournaments, etc etc. A quick comparison with GiG who is taking the opposite approach to Aspire clearly shows that it makes the company less profitable and that by quite a margin.
So much to that, but let's look forward. Conor and Rachel noted that they are in talks with Aspire to alleviate some of the current issues, e.g. that they can choose their RTP setting. IMO, that is most probably wishful thinking since it will be a direct cut to the profitability of Aspire. It is a huge difference when they run a game like BoD on 91.25%, 94.50% or 96.50%. I can't fathom Aspire allowing all their White Label brands to simply cut their profits willy-nilly.
Time will tell, but at the moment Trada is just another bland Aspire site with nothing special going for it other than two active reps. Whether that will improve is rather doubtful.